The legal issue isn’t solely about housing, but about whether cities have unlimited power to extract concessions from homebuilders for things that are not “impacts” from the project. In other words, it’s legitimate for government to require new developments to pay to mitigate the effect of the new residents on local infrastructure (roads, sewers, fire service), but is it OK for cities to require affordable housing just because officials want to see more of it built?
View ArticleCategories
- Employment
- Economy
- Public Finance
- Regulation
- Cost of Living
- Business Climate
- Income
- Energy
- Wages
- Housing
- Indicators
- Education
- Infrastructure
- Demographics
- Unemployment
- Green Jobs
- Business Migration
- Firms
- Uncategorized
- Sales
- Trade
- Legal Climate
- Economic Development
- Health Care
- Projections
- Economic Impact
- Job Growth
- Transportation
- Manufacturing
- Job Trends
- Government
- Population
- Leisure and Hospitality
- Tourism
- Other Services
- Professional, Scientific & Technical Skills
- Legislation
- Information
- National
- Street Insider
- Transportation & Warehousing
- Occupations
Industries
- Economy
- Government
- Manufacturing
- Utilities
- Information
- Construction
- Trade
- Transportation
- Retail
- Warehousing
- Healthcare & Social Assistance
- Accommodation & Food Services
- Mining
- Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting
- Education and Health
- Forestry
- Transportation & Warehousing
- Hunting
- Fishing
- Agriculture
- Financial Activities
- Finance & Insurance
- Leisure and Hospitality
- Professional and Business Services
- Social Assistance
- Health Care
- Wholesale Trade
- Educational Services
- Other Services
- Natural Resources
- Arts, Entertainment, & Recreation
- Professional, Scientific, & Technical Skills
- Farming
- Administration
- Support
- Waste Management
- Remediation
- Real Estate & Rental & Leasing